Gita Rahasya -Tilak 371

Gita Rahasya -Tilak

CHAPTER XI RENUNCITATION AND KARMA-YOGA Some persons now-a-days believe that the Bhagavata and the Smarta paths originally came into existence as a result of a difference between the objects of worship; but according to me, this belief is wrong; because, although the objects of worship in these two paths may be different, yet the Metaphysical Knowledge contained in both is the same; and when the Metaphysical foundation of both was the same, it is not likely that these ancient Jnanins, who were steeped in this Supreme Knowledge, would have kept up differences between themselves, merely on account of a differ- ence in the objects of worship. For this reason, it is stated both in the Bhagavadgita (9. 14) and in the Sivagita (12. 4) that, whatever is worshipped, the worship ultimately reaches one and the same Paramesvara; and these two deities have been described in the Narayaniya doctrine in the Mahabharata as being identical, by saying that Narayana. is the same as Rudra, that the worshippers of Narayana were the worshippers of Rudra, and the enemies of Narayana, the enemies of Rudra I do not say that the difference between Saivism and Vaisnavism did not exist in ancient times. What I mean to say is that the original reason for the difference between the Smarta and Bhagavata paths, was not the difference in the objects of worship, namely, Siva and Visnu ; and that these two paths must have first come into existence as a result of a difference of opinion on an important point, namely, whether Asceticism or Activism should be followed after the acqui- sition of Knowledge. After a considerable lapse of time, when this Activistic path or Karma- Yoga of the original Bhagavata religion ceased to exist, and it got its present form of the pure worship of Visnu, tnat is to say, a more or less Non-Activistic- form, and on that account, people began to fight with each other merely on the ground that the deity of one was Siva, whereas the deity of the other was Visnu, the words 'Smarta’ and 'Bhagavata' became respectively synonymous withi ' Saiva ' and 'Vaisnava '; and ultimately the Vedanta of these- present-day followers of the Bhagavata religion (Dualism or Qualified Monism), and their astrology, that is to say, the observance of the eleventh day of the month, as also the way of applying the sandal-wood paste on the forehead, became different from the Smarta way. But, it becomes quite clear- from the word ' Smarta ' that these differences were not real,, that is, original. As the Bhagavata religion was promulgated' by the Blessed Lord Himself, there is no wonder that the object of worship in it should be the Blessed Lord Sri Krsna or Visnu. But, as the root-meaning of the word ' Smarta ' is ' prescribed by the Smrtis ', the deity worshipped according to the Smarta path- need not be Siva ; because, it is nowhere stated in the works of Manu or other ancient Smrti texts, that Siva is the only deity which should be worshipped.